Brown to 'reform' electoral system
09 June 2009, 08:24 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Talk to the hand....
Posts: 13,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brown to 'reform' electoral system
Here we go - we knew he would try something like this.
He is clearly going to try and rig the electoral system in Nu Labs favour in a last ditch attempt to cling to power. All dressed up as 'reform' of course.
The opposition need to watch the slimey one eyed c*nt like a hawk for the next 10 months - he is undoubtedly up to something and they must stop him at all costs.
He is clearly going to try and rig the electoral system in Nu Labs favour in a last ditch attempt to cling to power. All dressed up as 'reform' of course.
The opposition need to watch the slimey one eyed c*nt like a hawk for the next 10 months - he is undoubtedly up to something and they must stop him at all costs.
09 June 2009, 08:35 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Runway two seven right.
Posts: 6,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09 June 2009, 08:55 PM
#6
Let's see.
He get's to run the country on the back of an election won by TB, whose Labour party managed to garner 35.3% of the vote in the last election.
With this 35.3% of the vote, the Labour party has a massive majority in the House of Commons.
Why would anyone want to reform such a democratic system?
He get's to run the country on the back of an election won by TB, whose Labour party managed to garner 35.3% of the vote in the last election.
With this 35.3% of the vote, the Labour party has a massive majority in the House of Commons.
Why would anyone want to reform such a democratic system?
09 June 2009, 09:23 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: l'on n'y peut rien
Posts: 2,922
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Brown will say there would have to be a referendum before any change could be made to the voting system.
Trending Topics
09 June 2009, 11:12 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This could actually be a good thing, anyone with half a brain knows that our system for electing a parliament is seriously flawed (as mentioned before you get huge majorities on the basis on way less than half the vote)
Some kind of PR or revised FPP system could work and make for far more representative government - now surely we can all agree on that.
I guess the big problem with PR is that we'll end up with the Liberals holding the balance of power and being in government from now till the end of time.
So if this is a genuine attempt to breath a bit of democracy into our system then in principle I'm all for it....as always though the devil will be in the detail. But I think it's going to take a seriously generous system that converts a Labour share of the vote of 15% into a majority
Some kind of PR or revised FPP system could work and make for far more representative government - now surely we can all agree on that.
I guess the big problem with PR is that we'll end up with the Liberals holding the balance of power and being in government from now till the end of time.
So if this is a genuine attempt to breath a bit of democracy into our system then in principle I'm all for it....as always though the devil will be in the detail. But I think it's going to take a seriously generous system that converts a Labour share of the vote of 15% into a majority
Last edited by Martin2005; 09 June 2009 at 11:13 PM.
10 June 2009, 09:15 AM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brilliant!
Brown tries to reform something which some on here moan about constantly and he gets slagged off about it
Mind you, I have to admit that it could win Labour another Election if it's done right ... very crafty, but you have got to admire the trickery!
Brown tries to reform something which some on here moan about constantly and he gets slagged off about it
Mind you, I have to admit that it could win Labour another Election if it's done right ... very crafty, but you have got to admire the trickery!
10 June 2009, 10:09 AM
#11
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Talk to the hand....
Posts: 13,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This tells you all you will ever need to know about the conniving, dysfunctional, delusional bully that inhabits the No 10 bunker with his new found 'friend' Mandy - and the pissy one!!
Because they can't rig the votes that easily on a national scale, they are now trying to rig the electoral system.
10 June 2009, 10:21 AM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here, There, Everywhere
Posts: 10,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If they change anything, I'd hope it was that we get to vote for a leader, and not the Party.
That way Mr. One eyed w@nker wouldn't be in power now.
That way Mr. One eyed w@nker wouldn't be in power now.
10 June 2009, 10:23 AM
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
This'll be Flash the great reformer who refuses to release the report, even with personal details covered up, that *clears* Shahid Malik. From, amongst other places, Gordon Brown accused of expenses 'cover-up' over Shahid Malik's return to Government - Telegraph
There is no way on earth that Flash will a) reform anything unless it's to his/Labour's advantage, but, more importantly, b) there is no way that any of the current sh}sters should be allowed any reforming at all. There should b an election NOW!
Dave
There is no way on earth that Flash will a) reform anything unless it's to his/Labour's advantage, but, more importantly, b) there is no way that any of the current sh}sters should be allowed any reforming at all. There should b an election NOW!
Dave
10 June 2009, 10:31 AM
#14
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 6,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The longer he leaves it the better it will be in the long term.
It took 12 years for the morons to forget how bad labour were and are.
At this rate we'll NEVER have to put up with another LABOUR Government - EVER.
If someone came up with a "Peoples Party" where you got to phone vote for policy decisions they'd be in forever !
It took 12 years for the morons to forget how bad labour were and are.
At this rate we'll NEVER have to put up with another LABOUR Government - EVER.
If someone came up with a "Peoples Party" where you got to phone vote for policy decisions they'd be in forever !
Last edited by jasey; 10 June 2009 at 10:37 AM.
10 June 2009, 10:41 AM
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
10 June 2009, 11:03 AM
#17
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 6,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No because it only ever gets discussed properly when the incumbents have made a complete **** of governing the country.
So we have a load of old pish from Brown as he tries to save his neck / his party from the **** rather than trying to save us from the **** pile he's been responsible for.
I'd rather discuss why Gordon Brown refuses to call an election - that's all th ereform most people are looking for - get this shower out !
So we have a load of old pish from Brown as he tries to save his neck / his party from the **** rather than trying to save us from the **** pile he's been responsible for.
I'd rather discuss why Gordon Brown refuses to call an election - that's all th ereform most people are looking for - get this shower out !
10 June 2009, 11:04 AM
#18
Martin.... I am not sure how you can have a thorough voting system. Every single on has it pro's and con's. PR is not my main worry. My main worry is voting in an election based on promises and reforms stipulated by the party in the run up to the elections only to find out that the said reforms and promises were just nonsense and that they never materialise. This leaves the voter feeling robbed and lied to.
I do not know how it would work but I would suggest that after every election (where the party is voted for) the pm has a one year or two year period and then a smaller PM only election is called for where the population can vote out the PM (not the party).... this would go to ensure some sort of method of ensuring that PM's etc actually follow through with their promises
I do not know how it would work but I would suggest that after every election (where the party is voted for) the pm has a one year or two year period and then a smaller PM only election is called for where the population can vote out the PM (not the party).... this would go to ensure some sort of method of ensuring that PM's etc actually follow through with their promises
10 June 2009, 11:05 AM
#19
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 6,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10 June 2009, 11:09 AM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No because it only ever gets discussed properly when the incumbents have made a complete **** of governing the country.
So we have a load of old pish from Brown as he tries to save his neck / his party from the **** rather than trying to save us from the **** pile he's been responsible for.
I'd rather discuss why Gordon Brown refuses to call an election - that's all th ereform most people are looking for - get this shower out !
So we have a load of old pish from Brown as he tries to save his neck / his party from the **** rather than trying to save us from the **** pile he's been responsible for.
I'd rather discuss why Gordon Brown refuses to call an election - that's all th ereform most people are looking for - get this shower out !
But there would be no chance of electoral reform being in place for the next election. So it will have no impact on the scale of Labours defeat at the polls next year
10 June 2009, 11:12 AM
#21
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Talk to the hand....
Posts: 13,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brown is not an elected Prime Minister. He now has increasingly a cabinet non elected people advising him. This is clearly wrong.
He has no mandate or God given right to interfere with the Constitution and voting procedures. That should be left to a proper duly elected Government.
There are not many more people left to desert the the Labour Government and Labour Party, but this move of his, certainly will cause him more damage.
The Queen should intervene immediately and dissolve this worthless Government.
He has no mandate or God given right to interfere with the Constitution and voting procedures. That should be left to a proper duly elected Government.
There are not many more people left to desert the the Labour Government and Labour Party, but this move of his, certainly will cause him more damage.
The Queen should intervene immediately and dissolve this worthless Government.
10 June 2009, 11:16 AM
#22
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brown is not an elected Prime Minister. He now has increasingly a cabinet non elected people advising him. This is clearly wrong.
He has no mandate or God given right to interfere with the Constitution and voting procedures. That should be left to a proper duly elected Government.
There are not many more people left to desert the the Labour Government and Labour Party, but this move of his, certainly will cause him more damage.
The Queen should intervene immediately and dissolve this worthless Government.
He has no mandate or God given right to interfere with the Constitution and voting procedures. That should be left to a proper duly elected Government.
There are not many more people left to desert the the Labour Government and Labour Party, but this move of his, certainly will cause him more damage.
The Queen should intervene immediately and dissolve this worthless Government.
Reading this it's hard to understand whether you are in favour of constitutional reform or not.
10 June 2009, 11:25 AM
#24
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hopefully it's going to be broader than just electoral reforms and will alos cover off
A written constitution / bill of rights
House of Lords reform
Increasing the power of parliament
Last edited by Martin2005; 10 June 2009 at 11:29 AM.
10 June 2009, 12:04 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This could actually be a good thing, anyone with half a brain knows that our system for electing a parliament is seriously flawed (as mentioned before you get huge majorities on the basis on way less than half the vote)
Some kind of PR or revised FPP system could work and make for far more representative government - now surely we can all agree on that.
I guess the big problem with PR is that we'll end up with the Liberals holding the balance of power and being in government from now till the end of time.
So if this is a genuine attempt to breath a bit of democracy into our system then in principle I'm all for it....as always though the devil will be in the detail. But I think it's going to take a seriously generous system that converts a Labour share of the vote of 15% into a majority
Some kind of PR or revised FPP system could work and make for far more representative government - now surely we can all agree on that.
I guess the big problem with PR is that we'll end up with the Liberals holding the balance of power and being in government from now till the end of time.
So if this is a genuine attempt to breath a bit of democracy into our system then in principle I'm all for it....as always though the devil will be in the detail. But I think it's going to take a seriously generous system that converts a Labour share of the vote of 15% into a majority
Please can you explain the practical differences between our present system and the PR system and exactly how one is as you say more democratic.
Les
10 June 2009, 12:12 PM
#26
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The next thing will be a change to all postal votes and we know how easily that system can be abused!
Les
10 June 2009, 12:14 PM
#27
Guest
Posts: n/a
Dave
10 June 2009, 12:15 PM
#28
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the 2005 general election
Share of Vote
Labour 37%
Con 33%
LD 22%
Seats
Labour 356
Con 209
LD 53
Share of seats
Labour 55%
Con 32%
LD 8%
Under a PR system the fair share would be more like
Labour 241 seats
Con 215 seats
LD 143 seats
So a PR system is inherently 'fairer' that the FPTP we currently have
10 June 2009, 12:17 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: www.Surreyscoobies.co.uk
Posts: 2,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1 vote for labour counts as 20 now and 100teenthousand votes for other parties counts as 2 votes for labour.
You can elect your local MP's but only if they are Labour MP's and if there are no Labour MP's then Labour win there automatically.
All ballot papers from now onwards will ONLY have Labour on and they will put the cross in the box for you to save you time.
You can elect your local MP's but only if they are Labour MP's and if there are no Labour MP's then Labour win there automatically.
All ballot papers from now onwards will ONLY have Labour on and they will put the cross in the box for you to save you time.
10 June 2009, 12:17 PM
#30
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutely not! Who would write it? Yep - the politicos who are part of the problem now. It would be massively in favour of what we, the electorate, would have to do for the state rather than any rights *we* would have 'by rights'. If you cite the US , their constitution was written in a vastly different scenario from what we have today, thus is not really a good example. And check out the US news/blogs. Even that is getting chipped away bit by bit.
Dave
Dave
When you say 'absolutely not' do you mean absolutely not debate and discuss it?